Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    I'm not saying it should. I'm saying when you want to highlight how awful the roster is, either through injuries or whatever, you better be able to acknowledge when he purposely made the roster worse.

    Playing Dunleavy or DJones at the 4 for mutliple games is a on the spot fireable offense, as far as I'm concerned. That's just insane asylum level crazy.
    Don't forget Murphy as center
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      Sure. I never said JOB was NOT AT ALL at fault, I'm just trying to point out the other things that are. I have no problem acknowledging where he IS at fault.
      I didn't say you, which is why I addressed UB's post.

      You and UB are on two completely different levels, as far as I'm concerned. I completely agree with you on saying Jim needs to stay around for the rest of the season. I wish he wasn't here to start the season, but he is, and I don't think a mid-season switch would do any good, so it's a moot point.

      But UB will defend Jim to the death, and I'm actually serious about that. I think UB will put something in his will about the fact that Jim is a good coach, etc, just to get the last word in on this one. (not really serious, but you get my point.)
      Last edited by Since86; 10-13-2010, 01:24 PM.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
        considering the talent level of the competiton we faced, and the players that played intially, I think to go 9-11 is one hell of an accomplishment
        We lost to the Clippers, Warriors, Bucks (twice) out of those 9. We had some interesting wins against strong teams, but if you are going to say that was successful you have to drop 2008-2009 from the list of JOB's horrible years, considering the number of upsets we had that year.

        You are essentially allowing extenuating circumstances for the guy you like and disallowing them for the guy you don't.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          UB, all that might be true, but it still doesn't excuse JOb for how he dicked around AJ, or the fact that he played either Mike or DJones at the 4 when he had Josh and Solo on the bench, etc.


          The whole problem with you're post is how your talking about maximizing wins. Does it really matter if they win 37 games and miss the playoffs or if they win 30? I don't think getting even 7 more wins out of your schedule is a positive when you consider how crappy he was in other areas.

          And I still think the wins would have came in just about the same total playing a different system. I still cannot fathom why a coach would put in a system that calls on his players weaknesses, rather than their strengths.

          Danny doesn't even properly fit into the system. It's absurd when your best player doesn't even fit it.

          The system is made perfectly for danny Granger - this is the best system for him. He cannot post, he isn't good isolated on the wings or top of the key - he isn't a good ballhandler. Jim O'Brien's system as it is has greatly enhanced Granger's career. (I'm talking offensively)

          As to your first point - I pointed out number of wins because a few of the posters in this thread keep saying there has been no improvment, no improvement, how can you keep the coach if there is no improvement. And in that line of discussion it makes a huge diofference if the team this year wins 37 vs 30 wins. (It will show improvement)

          Comment


          • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            The system is made perfectly for danny Granger - this is the best system for him. He cannot post, he isn't good isolated on the wings or top of the key - he isn't a good ballhandler. Jim O'Brien's system as it is has greatly enhanced Granger's career. (I'm talking offensively)
            You and I are about as polar opposites as can be. Danny taking five 3pters a night isn't what is best for him.

            And if it is such a perfect fit, then why do we discuss how Danny is one of the players that wasn't happy when JOb's option was picked up? You would think he would be HAPPY to play for a coach that coached his style of basketball.




            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            As to your first point - I pointed out number of wins because a few of the posters in this thread keep saying there has been no improvment, no improvement, how can you keep the coach if there is no improvement. And in that line of discussion it makes a huge diofference if the team this year wins 37 vs 30 wins. (It will show improvement)
            Getting extra wins while playing Murphy at the 5, and DJones as the 4 shows improvement rather than playing Solo at the 5 and McRoberts at the four? (And I'm not necassarily talking simultaneous play)

            Instead of getting Josh playing time back when Hans went out for good, and even seeing what Josh would bring isn't improvement? It wouldn't have actually been benefical for this year? Is that your argument?

            That the possible starting PF for the Pacers in the 10-11 season should have sat on the bench and watched DJones play at the 4 improved the team?

            So conversely playing the possible starting PF last year, and actually getting him experience, would have hurt the team because they didn't win the extra 3-4 games? (I'm cutting it in half because no one expected him to get playing time while Hans was still around)

            Call me crazy, but for some reason I think improving the team would be improving the players. Not just piecing in a ridiculous lineup to manage to get through.

            I mean seriously, you're saying playing DJones or Dunleavy at the 4 IMPROVED this team?
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              In fact, the weakness of the Colts' defense against the rush this year IS being attributed to injuries and young players, which I guess are only excuses when the Pacers use them.
              So you hear the Colts players making excuses?
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                So they won 32 games last year. Given the best coach in the league, how many games would that roster, with the same injuries,etc., have won?
                PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                Comment


                • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  You and I are about as polar opposites as can be. Danny taking five 3pters a night isn't what is best for him.

                  And if it is such a perfect fit, then why do we discuss how Danny is one of the players that wasn't happy when JOb's option was picked up? You would think he would be HAPPY to play for a coach that coached his style of basketball.






                  Getting extra wins while playing Murphy at the 5, and DJones as the 4 shows improvement rather than playing Solo at the 5 and McRoberts at the four? (And I'm not necassarily talking simultaneous play)

                  Instead of getting Josh playing time back when Hans went out for good, and even seeing what Josh would bring isn't improvement? It wouldn't have actually been benefical for this year? Is that your argument?

                  That the possible starting PF for the Pacers in the 10-11 season should have sat on the bench and watched DJones play at the 4 improved the team?

                  So conversely playing the possible starting PF last year, and actually getting him experience, would have hurt the team because they didn't win the extra 3-4 games? (I'm cutting it in half because no one expected him to get playing time while Hans was still around)

                  Call me crazy, but for some reason I think improving the team would be improving the players. Not just piecing in a ridiculous lineup to manage to get through.

                  I mean seriously, you're saying playing DJones or Dunleavy at the 4 IMPROVED this team?

                  No, I'm talking about improving this seaosn. Last season the pacers won 32 games. if they win more than 32 games that will show imprvovement and end one of the arguments that every year Jim has been our coach he loses more game than the previous season. (that was the context of my discussion of an improving record)


                  On the granger vs the system. There is more to the offensive system than shooting threes. Is that all you see. I see a free flowing system (perfect for danny) a system that doesn't ask Danny to isolate and create a shot (he's not good at that) the system is designed around Danny he is one of the primary reasons why we run this system. Just as O'Brien designed his offense around Pierce and Walker in Boston and Iverson in Philly, Jim has designed this offense around Danny (and Mike Dunleavy also)

                  I have never seen any evidence that Danny isn't happy with Jim O'Brien - I haven't seen it and I watch everything.
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 10-13-2010, 02:02 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                    38.

                    EDIT: Answering MR's question.
                    Last edited by Since86; 10-13-2010, 02:03 PM.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      We were 7-2 at the end of the brawl game.

                      In the 20 games after the brawl, we were 9-11.

                      In the next 20 we were 7-13.
                      No one ever remembers: sure the Pacers won the night after the brawl, but then they lost 6 straight games thereafter

                      No, I am way wrong. I'll blame the stupid website i was looking at. I should have trusted my memory.
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 10-13-2010, 02:23 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                        The number of wins isn't all inclusive of showing "improvement."

                        Yes, the did improve. But they didn't improve nearly enough. Why? Because players that should have played sat on the bench. Instead of getting their stripes when it really didn't matter, we now have to go through that process with a fresh new season.

                        They were never going to make the playoffs, so what is your goals for the end of the season? To win as many games, or improve your players so you can win as many games next season?

                        I shouldn't have to explain this to you UB, I've interacted with you long enough and in other areas to know that you know that sometimes living in the present isn't what you should be doing.

                        It's like saving money. You can't buy what you want while your saving money (You can't win as much while you play young players) but in a few months you go out and you purchase that brand spanking new 55 LED TV that you want.

                        You sacrifice the present in order to get to your goal down the road.

                        Wins and losses last year don't mean a damn thing. Unless you're on the edge, wins and losses just don't matter. Developing players means more than eeking out a couple of extra wins.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                          My hat is off the BillS, and to UncleBuck and flox, for fighting the good fight here.



                          .
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            The number of wins isn't all inclusive of showing "improvement."

                            Stop - we are discussing totally different things. I must be getting really bad at all this (making my points clearly)

                            I was specifically referencing the number of wins in response to either Vnzla81 (I think) or maybe it was 90'sNBARocked (I apologize I forget who). But they were making the point that every year Jim has been here the pacers record has gotten worse from one year to the next. (last year being the worst at 32 wins) That was proof that Jim was a bad as it showed that things were getting worse not better. (That was the context in which I mentioned the number of wins) I wasn't discussing anything that you are talking about

                            OK, please let me know u understand my point before we move on


                            Originally Posted by 90'sNBARocked
                            So please tell me why Isiaha is a worse coach and deserved to be fired, but somehow magically O'Brien gets a pass after after contiously posting a record that gets worse every year
                            Last edited by Unclebuck; 10-13-2010, 02:13 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                              Fully understood.

                              Then, without discussing W/L, please tell me how the team improved.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: So What Are Your Expectations For The Pacers?

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                No one ever remembers: sure the Pacers won the night after the brawl, but then they lost 6 straight games thereafter
                                Actually, didn't they lose to Orlando that game after the brawl?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X